Star Trek is dead – long live Star Trek

[Jackson_Roykirk]

...Most of the really good Trek shows are stories that are ambitious enough to draw some inspiration from - the heavy "message" shows were always awful.

"The Doomsday Machine," for example, was a story about an obsessed character. That it bore the standard observation that people shouldn't play with big things that go "Boom!" is trivial....

For me at least, this is true about any good work of fiction (book, movie, TV episode, etc.). I get more enjoyment out of an interesting character and great dialogue (especially great dialogue) than I do out of the plot or underlying message.

The plot or message is just a vehicle for the interesting characters to say interesting things.

 

[ST-One]

There is a minor flaw in your analogy as well. While Bond, Batman, etc, existed in other forms, the vast-vast majority of people only know them from their cinematic\T.V. appearances. Let's be honest, how many people actually read a Fleming novel? How many read comics?
For most people Bond was Connery, Superman was Reeve and so on. That didn't stop Hollywood from recasting them multiple times.
Also, Shatner and the gang haven't played their Trek characters in a major production for almost 20 years. If you show a picture of Shatner to Joe-six-pack, he'll tell you that's the guy from Boston Legal, not Captain Kirk.

Probably depends upon your age. I'm guessing I'm a LOT older than you. Superman for example was a character I knew long before the movie came out.

Do you know that the former actor who portrayed Superman also appeared in 'Superman - The Movie'?

 

[gh4chiefs]

^I assume you mean an actor who portrayed Superman in some of the earlier movie serials because George Reeves was dead by that time. And no, I didn't know that. Who was it and what part did he play?

 

[ST-One]

^I assume you mean an actor who portrayed Superman in some of the earlier movie serials because George Reeves was dead by that time. And no, I didn't know that. Who was it and what part did he play?

I actually don't know what the actors name is (and I have this info only from the commentary track on the DVD), but he was the man in the train at the beginning of the movie (you know, the one who tells young Lois not to make up stories). The woman in that scene (according to the commentary) played Lois Lane once.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That would be Kirk Alyn, the first movie serial Superman.

 

[gh4chiefs]

The woman in that scene (according to the commentary) played Lois Lane once.

Yeah she played in the 1950's TV series as Lois Lane. Noel Neil (sp?) I believe (Or was it Phyllis Coates, I'm suddenly having a brain fart.)

That would be Kirk Alyn, the first movie serial Superman.

I'll be damned. All these years and I had NEVER heard that before. Wow, learn something every day.

 

[ST-One]

The woman in that scene (according to the commentary) played Lois Lane once.

Yeah she played in the 1950's TV series as Lois Lane. Noel Neil (sp?) I believe (Or was it Phyllis Coates, I'm suddenly having a brain fart.)

That would be Kirk Alyn, the first movie serial Superman.

I'll be damned. All these years and I had NEVER heard that before. Wow, learn something every day.

Glad to be of service.

And thanks, Dennis.

 

[Augustus]

3 pages later....

It is fun to see the mindset of many change on this board. I remember a couple of years ago, must people were very skeptical about this entire thing. Now the OP is calling trek as we know it "dead" and most people are fine with that.

hey, I am fine with that too...

Just think it wouldn't happen so fast.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Trek is not dead, nor will it ever be.

This movie doesn't mean that TOS, the series, has become worthless, of course. It still exists. This new film, just because it looks different, that does not make it a reboot or anything like that. It is simply another chapter.

As has already been pointed out, this film is canon, because it's a film. And until I hear differently, it takes place in the same continuity as all other Trek. I don't bloody well care how different it *looks*.

The way I see it, the visual style is simply a way of interpreting the action. Like a 'filter' through which you view it all. Everything that happened in TOS, with the crew and ship looking like it did there, happened in "this" Trek, with this film's own style. There is no reboot here.

And if you like reading TOS novels, you can choose to picture them either with TOS's style, or with ST XI's. It's all the same, really.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

...The way I see it, the visual style is simply a way of interpreting the action. Like a 'filter' through which you view it all. Everything that happened in TOS, with the crew and ship looking like it did there, happened in "this" Trek, with this film's own style...

(emphasis mine)

That's a great way to approach this film.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Star Trek will never die.

It's just the Paramount pipeline that might dry up for awhile, once this thing does its dead cat bounce at the box office.

We'll always have the fan films.

 

[AudioBridge]

Trek is not dead, nor will it ever be.

This new film, just because it looks different, that does not make it a reboot or anything like that. It is simply another chapter.

As has already been pointed out, this film is canon, because it's a film. And until I hear differently, it takes place in the same continuity as all other Trek. I don't bloody well care how different it *looks*.

Well, the way I phrased it in my original post is that Trek as we know it is dead, but that's just arguing semantics. I think the items I posted from the article and the people involved show that the filmmakers disagree with you. This is clearly meant to be differentiated from what has come before, both story-wise and design-wise. The timer has obviously been reset. Now, you're free, of course, to consider this film "canon" within the strict sense of the word, but I'm willing to bet that in order to do that after we see this film the canon will have to be revised quite a bit. I think it would be a great deal easier (and ultimately more rewarding) to simply look at this as the reimagining of the ST universe that it is and leave the canon behind.

 

[Captain Robert April]

The only ones leaving canon behind are the pinheads at Paramount, specifically the motion picture division. Mike Okuda and Co. with the TOS-R project didn't make any major changes in canon, Pocket Books isn't ditching anything, nor is IDW with the assorted comic books, and I think it's safe to say the fan film folks are keeping the canon pretty well.

Worst case scenario: Movie tanks, Paramount pulls the plug on all Star Trek merchandizing (not likely, since it's still making Paramount megabucks, albeit not as mega as in previous years), and the property goes dormant, at least officially.

We just return to the way things were in the 70's, with the exception that we won't be making fanzine stories, we'll be making our own shows.

And that is something that would delight Gene Roddenberry to no end.

 

[ST-One]

The only ones leaving canon behind are the pinheads at Paramount, specifically the motion picture division. Mike Okuda and Co. with the TOS-R project didn't make any major changes in canon, Pocket Books isn't ditching anything, nor is IDW with the assorted comic books, and I think it's safe to say the fan film folks are keeping the canon pretty well.

Worst case scenario: Movie tanks, Paramount pulls the plug on all Star Trek merchandizing (not likely, since it's still making Paramount megabucks, albeit not as mega as in previous years), and the property goes dormant, at least officially.

We just return to the way things were in the 70's, with the exception that we won't be making fanzine stories, we'll be making our own shows.

And that is something that would delight Gene Roddenberry to no end.

No, it wouldn't.
He wouldn't make a single buck from that.
IDIC-symbol anyone?

 

[Captain Robert April]

Gene made his money already. Mainly due to his lawyer teaming up with Shatner's lawyer and finally getting Paramount to get honest with the accounting. Lots of backpayments of royalties in that deal, so GR didn't feel the need to be as much the money-grubbing bastard he'd been previously.

And he was always very big on catering to the fans.

 

[Qonos]

The only ones leaving canon behind are the pinheads at Paramount, specifically the motion picture division. Mike Okuda and Co. with the TOS-R project didn't make any major changes in canon, Pocket Books isn't ditching anything, nor is IDW with the assorted comic books, and I think it's safe to say the fan film folks are keeping the canon pretty well.

Worst case scenario: Movie tanks, Paramount pulls the plug on all Star Trek merchandizing (not likely, since it's still making Paramount megabucks, albeit not as mega as in previous years), and the property goes dormant, at least officially.

We just return to the way things were in the 70's, with the exception that we won't be making fanzine stories, we'll be making our own shows.

And that is something that would delight Gene Roddenberry to no end.

No, it wouldn't.
He wouldn't make a single buck from that.
IDIC-symbol anyone?

Especially since Gene was about making a buck. Like that stinker he pulled with Courage over the theme song royalties.. www.snopes.com look it up.

TOS Trek DIED with Gene had had been dead many years by the time we found it's brain dead corpse being kept alive by the Berman life support system in Paramount's back room.

BTW according to Gene when he was alive, the Books weren't canon, the animated series wasn't canon. The Comics? Nope not canon either.

Heck some people argue that name your using isn't canon either and swear the only other captain of the Enterprise before Kirk was Pike..

Now I can see this type of division in say Transformers, but in Star Trek where everything happened in linear progression? Heck it wasn't even called the federation till a couple shows in.

I don't understand what all this hate is about, Trek is SICK it needs fixing, we've had so much happen to the continuity that it doesn't even recognize itself anymore. This new movie ISN'T Star Trek 11, let's stop using that one right now.. It's Star Trek. There's no number behind those letters, this is like the Infinite Crisis in DC, lets how this continuity clean up works though.

Oh and I've read your blog you've got a vivid imagination Robert, but you're way off at least two of those things... Why don't you watch the movie instead of trying to figure out what Orci and Kurtzman wrote.. Because in none of those pictures did it look like the rest of the bridge crew were shunning him.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Star Trek is dead – long live Star Trek

The only ones leaving canon behind are the pinheads at Paramount.

Since the property owners are the only ones who can define what's "canon" - that is, part of the official continuity - and what isn't, the pinheads at Paramount are the folks who count where Trek's future is concerned.

The proposition that Gene Roddenberry would rather have fans making cheap Trek movies that he saw no money from than collect big bucks from the studio in exchange for his imprimatur on what they produce is laughably uninformed - at best.

BTW according to Gene when he was alive, the Books weren't canon, the animated series wasn't canon. The Comics? Nope not canon either.

By his explicit standards, Robert April wasn't "canon" either.

 

[ST-One]

The only ones leaving canon behind are the pinheads at Paramount.

Since the property owners are the only ones who can define what's "canon" - that is, part of the official continuity - and what isn't, the pinheads at Paramount are the folks who count where Trek's future is concerned.

The proposition that Gene Roddenberry would rather have fans making cheap Trek movies that he saw no money from than collect big bucks from the studio in exchange for his imprimatur on what they produce is laughably uninformed - at best.

BTW according to Gene when he was alive, the Books weren't canon, the animated series wasn't canon. The Comics? Nope not canon either.

By his explicit standards, Robert April wasn't "canon" either.

I was waiting to make that joke.
Damn you!!

 

[Qonos]

The only ones leaving canon behind are the pinheads at Paramount.

Since the property owners are the only ones who can define what's "canon" - that is, part of the official continuity - and what isn't, the pinheads at Paramount are the folks who count where Trek's future is concerned.

The proposition that Gene Roddenberry would rather have fans making cheap Trek movies that he saw no money from than collect big bucks from the studio in exchange for his imprimatur on what they produce is laughably uninformed - at best.

BTW according to Gene when he was alive, the Books weren't canon, the animated series wasn't canon. The Comics? Nope not canon either.

By his explicit standards, Robert April wasn't "canon" either.

I was waiting to make that joke.
Damn you!!

In fact the only thing that happened off screen that IS canon..

Khan seeing Checkov on the Enterprise....

 

[Sector 7]

For most people Bond was Connery, Superman was Reeve and so on. That didn't stop Hollywood from recasting them multiple times.

There's no obsession or emphasis on canon if there's any at all with Bond or Superman for anyone to be bothered with anyone rebooting it or each incarnation having nothing to do with each other.

Not the case with Star Trek. If this is a reboot then it would mean we would have 2 different Star Treks.

We still have Star Trek. It has survived many other incarnations. It will survive this incarnation as well. I think it will breathe new life into a hurting franchise.

Oh, I might be making some space on my coffee table for the sequel (I'm a terribly housekeeper; I just stack things). But that's about it.

Yeah, the sequel is pretty much a given, unless the thing totally bombs. Aside from that, we'll see.

I'm certainly not in the Reject the New Movie Because It's Not Canon camp.

But I'm not in the Old Star Trek Is Dead camp, either.

Hence, the topic title: Star Trek is dead - long live Star Trek
IMO, I grew up loving TOS, but there is NO POSSIBLE WAY to make a movie or series with the original cast. Period. End of story. So what to do? Make new stories with the CHARACTERS I grew to love. New actors are playing them... so what? I remember when Batman was Adam West.. I still saw the new movie in 1989 and grew to like Michael Keaton in the role. Pierce Brosnan was a hell of a good James Bond, there's been a different one every decade or so... the franchise lives.
Star Trek will live, too!